Staff Scientist Perspectives on Onboarding and Professional Development: A Case Study

Across the United States, the number of staff scientists (master's- or doctoral-level professionals working in nonfaculty roles) has grown by 35% since 2010, and they play an increasingly important role in research efforts. However, few targeted resources are available, which potentially limits the effectiveness of this group. Launched in 2016, the staff scientist path at Emory has tripled in size over 4 y to 138 staff. The present case study evaluated the perceptions of staff scientists related to onboarding experiences and professional development needs, including those needs arising from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) impacts in the workplace. A survey of Emory staff scientists was conducted from May to June 2019 as part of a program evaluation initiative to assess perceptions of onboarding and professional development opportunities. Interviews with a subset of scientists informed the survey development and identified COVID-19-related impacts on daily work. Results indicated the need for targeted orientation resources specific to staff scientists, accurate and timely information and resources to support scientists' supervisors, and professional development for scientists in leadership and management-related skills. Remote work associated with COVID-19 accentuated the need for managerial skills, including team development in digital work environments. Findings from this case study can inform policies and practices at Emory and other institutions that employ a similar staff scientist model.

NIH's scientific approach to inclusive excellence

The representation of women and scientists from underrepresented groups (URGs), including Black/African Americans, Hispanic/Latinx, Pacific Islanders, and American Indians, diminishes as individuals advance in their careers from training to senior leadership positions. Correcting this imbalance requires integrated strategies to achieve inclusive excellence within the scientific workforce reflected by creating and sustaining environments, in which diverse talent thrives. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) Scientific Workforce Diversity office has led the charge to develop and implement evidence-informed interventions toward achieving this goal that undergirds NIH's mission to improve the nation's health. Past and current efforts aiming to enhance workforce diversity but targeted to individuals are necessary but insufficient for lasting change. Thus, NIH-funded institutions should develop and prioritize integrated, systems-targeted efforts as foundational components of a well-supported, productive workforce. At the heart of these endeavors is institutional accountability that ties progress toward inclusive excellence to institutional values and reward systems.

Changing demographics of scientific careers: The rise of the temporary workforce

Contemporary science has been characterized by an exponential growth in publications and a rise of team science. At the same time, there has been an increase in the number of awarded PhD degrees, which has not been accompanied by a similar expansion in the number of academic positions. In such a competitive environment, an important measure of academic success is the ability to maintain a long active career in science. In this paper, we study workforce trends in three scientific disciplines over half a century. We find dramatic shortening of careers of scientists across all three disciplines. The time over which half of the cohort has left the field has shortened from 35 y in the 1960s to only 5 y in the 2010s. In addition, we find a rapid rise (from 25 to 60% since the 1960s) of a group of scientists who spend their entire career only as supporting authors without having led a publication. Altogether, the fraction of entering researchers who achieve full careers has diminished, while the class of temporary scientists has escalated. We provide an interpretation of our empirical results in terms of a survival model from which we infer potential factors of success in scientific career survivability. Cohort attrition can be successfully modeled by a relatively simple hazard probability function. Although we find statistically significant trends between survivability and an author's early productivity, neither productivity nor the citation impact of early work or the level of initial collaboration can serve as a reliable predictor of ultimate survivability.

New linked data on research investments: scientific workforce, productivity, and public value

Longitudinal micro-data derived from transaction level information about wage and vendor payments made by federal grants on multiple U.S. campuses are being developed in a partnership involving researchers, university administrators, representatives of federal agencies, and others. This paper describes the UMETRICS data initiative that has been implemented under the auspices of the Committee on Institutional Cooperation. The resulting data set reflects an emerging conceptual framework for analyzing the process, products, and impact of research. It grows from and engages the work of a diverse and vibrant community. This paper situates the UMETRICS effort in the context of research evaluation and ongoing data infrastructure efforts in order to highlight its novel and valuable features. Refocusing data construction in this field around individuals, networks, and teams offers dramatic possibilities for data linkage, the evaluation of research investments, and the development of rigorous conceptual and empirical models. Two preliminary analyses of the scientific workforce and network approaches to characterizing scientific teams ground a discussion of future directions and a call for increased community engagement.

National Institutes of Health addresses the science of diversity

The US biomedical research workforce does not currently mirror the nation's population demographically, despite numerous attempts to increase diversity. This imbalance is limiting the promise of our biomedical enterprise for building knowledge and improving the nation's health. Beyond ensuring fairness in scientific workforce representation, recruiting and retaining a diverse set of minds and approaches is vital to harnessing the complete intellectual capital of the nation. The complexity inherent in diversifying the research workforce underscores the need for a rigorous scientific approach, consistent with the ways we address the challenges of science discovery and translation to human health. Herein, we identify four cross-cutting diversity challenges ripe for scientific exploration and opportunity: research evidence for diversity's impact on the quality and outputs of science; evidence-based approaches to recruitment and training; individual and institutional barriers to workforce diversity; and a national strategy for eliminating barriers to career transition, with scientifically based approaches for scaling and dissemination. Evidence-based data for each of these challenges should provide an integrated, stepwise approach to programs that enhance diversity rapidly within the biomedical research workforce.